Big Green has the 2016 election blues

The day after the presidential election the executive director of the Sierra Club glumly called the Donald Trump victory "deeply disturbing for the nation and the planet." Well, yes, if you're a climate change alarmist who hates fossil fuels, you're in for a bad four and maybe eight years.

Greenpeace Executive Director Annie Leonard was even more apocalyptic, saying: "I never thought I'd have to write this. The election of Donald Trump as President has been devastating. … There's no question, Donald Trump's climate denial is staggering. He wants to shut down the EPA, cancel the Paris Cimate Agreement, stop funding clean energy research and drill baby drill." Ah, but if this is so crazy, why did he win?

The short answer is that Americans went to the polls and rejected environmental extremism among other things. The biggest loser on election night was the Big Green movement in America dedicated to the anti-prosperity proposition that to save the planet from extinction we have to deindustrialize the U.S. and throw millions and millions of ‎our fellow citizens out of their jobs. Voters turned thumbs down on the climate change lobby and rightfully so.

It may seem an exaggeration to say that the radical leftist green groups want to throw working class Americans out of their jobs — but it isn't. They openly admit it.

The Sierra Club actually declared "victory" last year when it helped push several of America's leading coal production companies into bankruptcy.

Sierra Club spokeswoman Lena Moffitt took credit for destroying coal production in America, but she neglected to mention the tens of thousands of miners, truckers, construction workers and other blue collar workers who lost their jobs due to the Sierra Club campaign. What humanitarians these people are!

Ms. Moffitt promised that the Sierra Club will "bring the same expertise that we brought to taking down the coal industry and coal-fired power in this country to taking on gas in the same way. … to ensure that we're moving to a 100% clean energy future."

Wait a minute. There are an estimated 10 million Americans who are directly or indirectly employed by the oil and gas and coal industries. The left wants to put every one of these people out of a job? Will they use Stalinistic worker relocation programs to pull this off?
...

One reason Big Green lost is because they are losing the argument over global warming. By refusing to debate the issue and calling those who disagree with them deniers, they are losing. Voters put "climate change" near the bottom of their priorities and well below the economy and jobs, both of which would be put in the tank if their policies were put in place.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Hill:
Democrats are more fearful about what 2018 holds than Republicans, according to a poll released early Monday.

The new Axios survey showed 55 percent of Democrats are more hopeful personally about the new year while 44 percent are more fearful.

Among Republicans, 90 percent are more hopeful about 2018, and just 9 percent are more fearful.

When asked about the world in general, 29 percent of Democrats said they are more hopeful, compared to 70 percent who said they are more fearful.

Pollsters found 67 percent of Republicans are more hopeful about the world in general in the new year, and 32 percent are more fearful....
While this may just reflect Democrats' anxiety about being out of power, the poll also demonstrates a sense of optimism by Republicans. Except for a few of the never Trumpers, most Republicans have been pleasantly surprised by the accomplishments Trump has put in place in his first year in office. I think that is because Republicans are getting better at filte…

After the report of the hush money payments, Trump's popularity did not drop at all and was already higher than when he was elected. By reimbursing Cohen the money came out of Trump's own pocket and did not come from any campaign funds. It was much more legitimate than the government paying hush money to Congressional staffers who alleged sexual harassment. The John Edwards case also shows the weakness of the charge since his payments actually came out of campaign funds and the jury acquitted him of the charge.

The only voters who care about this are Democrats who didn't vote for him anyway. They care about because it is an excuse f…

Phillip Ewing:
Political and legal danger for President Trump may be sharpening by the day, but the case that his campaign might have conspired with the Russian attack on the 2016 election is still unproven despite two years of investigations, court filings and even numerous convictions and guilty pleas.

Trump has been implicated in ordering a scheme to silence two women ahead of Election Day in 2016 about the alleged sexual relationships they had with him years before.

That is a serious matter, or it might have been in other times, but this scheme is decidedly not a global conspiracy with a foreign power to steal the election.

More broadly, the president and his supporters say, the payments to the women in 2016 are penny ante stuff: Breaking campaign finance law, if that did take place, isn't like committing murder, said one lawyer for the president.

The "biased" Justice Department is just grasping at straws to use something against Trump because it hasn't been able…